They also send the GCN coverage through the Eurosport Player. At least that's how I watched it.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
They also send the GCN coverage through the Eurosport Player. At least that's how I watched it.
My ES Player feed (which had their preamble pre ES2 transmission) switched to snooker. Even had a dialogue between producer and snooker commentators about going on early!
The race hasn't been archived nor shown again on ES. To be fair, not much to watch!
I watched it on ES Player, but through the multi audio link.
Same here - it switched to snooker! So I got the GCN app and they'd gone off air anyway. All a bit of a shambles.
If by awesome you mean Scottish, then yes, his accent is pretty good. He was the one doing Strade Blanche and Milan - Turin with Carlton. Mixes well with Carlton as he ignores some of the rubbish that he says and explains stuff quite well.Brian Smith is the guy with the awesome accent, right?
If by awesome you mean Scottish, then yes, his accent is pretty good. He was the one doing Strade Blanche and Milan - Turin with Carlton.
Many commentators on numerous occasions fail to identify riders - Sometimes this is misinformation from race radio while on other occasions it can be hard to identify riders - Also Hatch and Backstedt misidentified riders in the final of the race - I suggest you watch a range of different commentary teams to provide more balance to your thoughts.
I agree Kirby will either be getting the rider wrong or spending minutes going "is it ... or .... I'm not sure " long after it is obvious to everyone watchingHe's right though that the general level in cycling commentary is very low, also compared to other sports. And Kirby appears to be one of the worst - although I don't listen to him very often, but when I do... well, I did not see this particular race, but I can imagine very well, what DaveJones is talking about...
It's not about identifying a rider wrongly here and there - of course that happens! It's about wrongly identifying key riders again and again and again, not for a second, but for minutes, when these riders have nothing in common but their team's jersey.
I am not a cycling specialist, but I can identify riders far better than a lot of commentators (well, not Paul Voss) It's not because I am so great at it, but because they are so bad. Of course it's easier for me: I can do it in peace, do not have to talk and entertain people while I am watching.
That said, my Dutch is very bad, but I have a feeling that there are some Dutch or Belgian commentators who are very good. The French ones are often okay, too. But (!) they are merely hired as experts I think, the English ones are entertainers. They scream, they build tension, they tell all kinds of stories that have nothing to do with what is happening right now. You could let any entertainer with a three month course in cycling knowledge do it. Their voices often sound good, have some narrator's / speaker's qualities. I think that should not be enough, though.
He's right though that the general level in cycling commentary is very low, also compared to other sports. And Kirby appears to be one of the worst - although I don't listen to him very often, but when I do... well, I did not see this particular race, but I can imagine very well, what DaveJones is talking about...
It's not about identifying a rider wrongly here and there - of course that happens! It's about wrongly identifying key riders again and again and again, not for a second, but for minutes, when these riders have nothing in common but their team's jersey.
I am not a cycling specialist, but I can identify riders far better than a lot of commentators (well, not Paul Voss) It's not because I am so great at it, but because they are so bad. Of course it's easier for me: I can do it in peace, do not have to talk and entertain people while I am watching.
That said, my Dutch is very bad, but I have a feeling that there are some Dutch or Belgian commentators who are very good. The French ones are often okay, too. But (!) they are merely hired as experts I think, the English ones are entertainers. They scream, they build tension, they tell all kinds of stories that have nothing to do with what is happening right now. You could let any entertainer with a three month course in cycling knowledge do it. Their voices often sound good, have some narrator's / speaker's qualities. I think that should not be enough, though.
Maybe read through this thread to find complaints about the commentators in the jurisdictions you mentioned - For heaven's sake Rob Hatch who is an excellent caller in the final of Piedmonte confused Albasini and Stannard, failed to recognise Valter, Aranbaru and Vlasov - The commentators are calling off the TV ( even moreso in these COVID times ) where close ups are limited - Some expect too much from commentators and it's also a good opportunity to have a whinge.
I'm pleased to have started a dialogue about this as it's good to have a spectrum of opinion on such things.
I'm actually really surprised to see anyone sticking up for the Eurosport commentators as I was convinced they irritated everyone else as much as me.
To be honest I agree that the specific individual identification in fleeting moments is sometimes very difficult and mistakes are both understandable and inevitable from time to time. I would suggest that the frequency of mistakes is far too high though; case in point when the commentary team have had the opportunity to observe roglic wearing the national champs jersey for many hours yesterday, to identify him as the winner when Jumbo were quite clearly working for Van Aert at the end anyway is just unacceptable. If I made such elementary mistakes at work I'd be sacked fairly quickly.
My main issue is that the Eurosport teams consistently fail to explain where the drama and excitement of a race is coming from. I'm in the fortunate position to know enough about cycling to interpret things myself, but it's much more difficult to do this when watching highlights as we haven't seen the race evolve.
The C4 duo of Boulting and Millar are excellent at this; they explain the relevance of breaks being made, teams protecting riders, predict attacks and counters at key moments. My wife could watch a TDF highlights episode knowing nothing about cycling and could tap in to a lot of the drama through them.
Watching an identical race on Eurosport, she would be clueless as to where the excitement was.
Yesterday was a fantastic case in point; towards the Piedmont finale on the highlights I had absolutely no idea who Jumbo were working for but they were absolutely smashing it on the front halfway up the penultimate climb. They should have pointed out that they were setting up Bennett for an attack and explained he was likely going to made a potentially race-defining break shortly after; that's where the drama was at that point in the race. Instead, they completely failed to mention this at all and wittered on about something completely irrelevant (I think they were talking about how they had been looking forward to watching a team that didn't even fully enter or some twaddle like that...I mean seriously wtf..)
I do actually think it's seriously detrimental to a lot of viewers enjoyment just how poor they are.
He's right though that the general level in cycling commentary is very low, also compared to other sports. And Kirby appears to be one of the worst - although I don't listen to him very often, but when I do... well, I did not see this particular race, but I can imagine very well, what DaveJones is talking about...
It's not about identifying a rider wrongly here and there - of course that happens! It's about wrongly identifying key riders again and again and again, not for a second, but for minutes, when these riders have nothing in common but their team's jersey.
I am not a cycling specialist, but I can identify riders far better than a lot of commentators (well, not Paul Voss) It's not because I am so great at it, but because they are so bad. Of course it's easier for me: I can do it in peace, do not have to talk and entertain people while I am watching.
That said, my Dutch is very bad, but I have a feeling that there are some Dutch or Belgian commentators who are very good. The French ones are often okay, too. But (!) they are merely hired as experts I think, the English ones are entertainers. They scream, they build tension, they tell all kinds of stories that have nothing to do with what is happening right now. You could let any entertainer with a three month course in cycling knowledge do it. Their voices often sound good, have some narrator's / speaker's qualities. I think that should not be enough, though.